WhatsApp Had No Plans to Compete With Facebook Co-Founder Says

Got up under oath, Acton disregarded the question put forth by the interrogator and said: he was completely adamant that the secret social network blueprints did not exist when he had sold his creation to Mark Zuckerberg. What it does is help Meta in its ongoing federal antitrust allegations while portraying a deal designed sans any ulterior advantage to take over Facebook turf.

The bombshell was dropped in the D.C. courtroom: According to WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton, Facebook features were never in the original plan. Acton testified that WhatsApp consciously distanced itself from chasing the social network’s signature feed and other common features. He further asserted that WhatsApp could have foregone ad targeting and thrived on subscriptions if only it had not been bought by Facebook.

In the courtroom banging, it is already Week Six with a grenade having been lobbed at Meta’s defense by WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton. The case is set for fireworks, as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is suing Meta Platforms, alleging that the tech giant formed an illegal social networking monopoly by its decade-old acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram. The FTC is proposing perhaps the wildest possible remedy: to break up Meta. Yet, Meta presents a very different story: there is a slew of competitors that keep them on their toes, from TikTok for viral dance crazes to Apple’s walled garden. The claim is that the FTC is merely willing to look past these rivalries as it seeks to dismember the company.

The FTC considers the Meta acquisition of WhatsApp a classic case: following a $19 billion buy, Meta was put in the firing line. Why? The FTC alleges Meta saw WhatsApp not merely as a messaging app but as a potential social network giant. Imagine the Meta executives, behind closed doors, sweating at the prospect of WhatsApp going full-blown competitor. Using internal emails and messages, FTC lawyers are alleging that, behind closed doors, Meta feared that WhatsApp could one day evolve out of mere private texting and start disrupting the bigger social media landscape. The acquisition, the FTC argues, was not only to wipe out a messaging app but to kill off an embryonic social networking rival.

Back in 2013, when the company was simply Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg foresaw the future. In a memo written for the board, he clearly identified the threat: not Google and not Twitter, but an apparently simple group messaging app. The fear was that this app would blossom into the next big social network, with Facebook left to eat dust.

The newly unveiled documents reveal a year-long courtship by Zuckerberg and for Meta’s thorough eye on competing messaging applications behind the $19 billion WhatsApp purchase.

Meta’s legal team responded with an extraordinary argument that the basic premise of WhatsApp was the radical opposition to the features now in question. An artifact from that ethos-or rather the experience of it- emerged; a handwritten note from Acton: “No Ads! No Games! No Gimmicks!” Former employees and board members echoed Acton’s words, implying that the idea of the platform was to be free from advertising. Meta’s lawyers even put Acton on the witness stand on Tuesday to categorically refute any suggestion that WhatsApp was ever intended to compete in the lucrative advertising space.

During a critical stage of the testimony, the lawyer for the FTC asked Acton very pointed questions about the acquisition of WhatsApp by Meta. Pressed with the inquiry of whether advertising value had been part of the Meta offer, Acton said he could not say for sure but that he had thought it was considered, given that advertising is Meta’s principal business model. When further pressed, Acton agreed saying that if it had not been acquired by Meta, WhatsApp would have been relentless in adding features, thereby depicting an independent WhatsApp always pushing forward with innovation.

He further spoke about resisting Facebook’s effort to launch a WhatsApp business platform, worrying about the eminent end-to-end encryption being compromised by it. This commercial endeavor took form, according to him, only after he had left. The FTC argues the case by proving that Facebook’s acquisitions somehow harmed consumers – harm that would not have existed if WhatsApp and Instagram remained independent agents.

Facing grilling from Meta’s legal team, WhatsApp co-founder Mr. Brian Acton conceded that the acquisition offer provided by Meta was reflective of WhatsApp’s user base at the time. He further revealed a little about the road not taken-whether nascent subscription model for WhatsApp, which had already gone live in seven countries in 2014, would have allowed them to realize even greater revenues through strategic price increases.

Brian Acton represents a story of magnificent success mingled with regrets. The WhatsApp billionaire cleaned up his riches exiting from Meta in 2018, now an easy $4.5 billion net worth. The golden parachute had some prices: anti that furious respects visions over aggressive monetization of WhatsApp as per advertisements by Meta since Acton stood for utmost privacy for its users. On his second-to-none moral ground, he walked away and remorsefully expressed his regret for sale. The mic drop: In light of Facebook’s damaging Cambridge Analytica scandal, Acton sent out one piercing tweet that would speak volumes: “#DeleteFacebook.”

The case is Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms Inc., 20-cv-03590, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

© 2025 Bloomberg LP

Advertisement

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Thanks for reading WhatsApp Had No Plans to Compete With Facebook Co-Founder Says